If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The French are making use of RAF and USAF C-17's to bring the hard needed material to Mali... now, I am wondering if the French will not look into buying a few C-17s for their own, as such opertions like Serval is showing that the lack of such strategic transport is a nightmare when you want to deploy troops and material fast!

I doubt it. France has ordered 50 A400M, and has mooted the possibility of accelerating deliveries. If the budget allowed it, further A400M orders have been floated as desirable, but that condition does not yet seem apparent... But further A400M orders seem more probable than C17. There is also An-124 thru SALIS (or other means), whose contract could be increased with An-124 possibly back in production, and C390 as a future C130 class transport seems reasonably likely. A330MRTT seem set to be purchased at some point soon as well. That's what all French strategic planning has come up with, and when it's achieved they will be more than well off in terms of transport. C17s would just eat into their budget for achieving these planned goals.

The French are making use of RAF and USAF C-17's to bring the hard needed material to Mali... now, I am wondering if the French will not look into buying a few C-17s for their own, as such opertions like Serval is showing that the lack of such strategic transport is a nightmare when you want to deploy troops and material fast!

I don't see how they can't be looking into getting some strategic transports as its clearly a a gaping hole in thier capability, one that effectively prevents them from operating on their own when undertaking adventures in foreign lands.

"In Afghanistan, you have some countries who really fight and others who do very little. For example, the German contingent and the Italian contingent don't have a combat role. There are many countries who do not want to fight, so working in the coalition is very tough," he noted.

And

The EU doesn't know how to wage war. It's not prepared to launch military operations of this type [Mali]," Goya said.

I don't see how they can't be looking into getting some strategic transports as its clearly a a gaping hole in thier capability

Mind you, France is looking (and was for a long time) into getting a more strategic transport capability.
The aircraft chosen for that role is the A400M, which is several years late (and more costly than originally - and badly I must say - planned).
France currently does suffer from a capability gap, because of the lateness of the Atlas program. As soon as the A400M is operational (first delivery later this year), there will be no more capability gap.

Let's no get back to the start of the debate, but pick-up where we stopped, 2 pages back.
I was saying:

Originally Posted by AlphaZulu

(...)the C-17 is a superb aircraft, offering roughly twice the payload and 1.5x the range of the A400M, at a slightly superior speed.
The question is not here IMO. The question is does France needs a "more strategic" transport than A400M for its military operations, considering all aspects: range, payload (quantity), payload (in "does that fit?" terms), speed, cost, one fleet vs multiple fleets.

France's answer to that question is, so far, "No". You seem to think France got it wrong. Would you care to explain why?

"In Afghanistan, you have some countries who really fight and others who do very little. For example, the German contingent and the Italian contingent don't have a combat role. There are many countries who do not want to fight, so working in the coalition is very tough," he noted.

And

The EU doesn't know how to wage war. It's not prepared to launch military operations of this type [Mali]," Goya said.

This is very interesting and chimes with what many observing from the sidelines have said in that past.

This is not very intersting it is just plain BS, I don't know if it is just a sign of ignorance or the colonel is in complete bad faith.
Anyway this officer shows no respect for the 52 Italian casulaties and the 56 German casualties who died in A-stan since the start of the operations, let alone for the military efforts of the involved Countries.

I invite the "many oserving from the sidelines" to find better sources on that conflict.

How long will it before there is a real need for troop carrying helicopters and or MERT helicopters and if the need is identified who will supply them as this is possibly another area the French are lacking at this time. The UK is at this time hard pressed with the puma fleet in upgrade and Merlin and Chinook fleets hard worked in A-stan that only really leaves the poor old Navy HC4 Sea Kings but again this would be more mission creep for the UK. Who has any real capability in this area

How long will it before there is a real need for troop carrying helicopters and or MERT helicopters and if the need is identified who will supply them as this is possibly another area the French are lacking at this time.

How long will it before there is a real need for troop carrying helicopters and or MERT helicopters and if the need is identified who will supply them as this is possibly another area the French are lacking at this time.

Hmm

Last I looked, the ALAT alone had 130 Pumas and 30 Cougars ( the latter mainly for CSAR ).

Of course, they're not all in theatre or online but neither are the UK assets you're suggesting.

Against that the RAF with 36 Pumas and 20 Merlins and the RN with 37 Commandos looks rather second-rate.

They may be lacking in heavy-lift ( no Chinook equivalent ) but the French army has always been well-equipped with basic troop lift.

On the contrary, the RAF didn't even want the Pumas and when they were foisted upon them the Army had to be content leaving them to moving high-value, time-critical assets ( e.g. MILAN or Blowpipe teams ) rather than troop assaults. There just weren't ever enough of them.

Compare with the SAAF who found 67 Pumas insufficient for their needs!

According to the french MoD and Le mamouth blog, in the last 36hrs 2 more Rafales joined in the operation that totalled about 30 sorties with air-strikes supporting SFs as well as regular army in taking Gao's airport, a brigde nearby in preparation for taking the town.

Looks like France is now deploying about 3000 troops and is well into the North of Mali (which Hollande said wouldn't happen), so I sure hope France will know when to stop or risk a very complicated situation.

While it's true that there is currently a capacity gap in strategic stransports, I doubt there would be an operational need to buy the C-17 given the number of A-400M on orders. That's pretty much the first time France requires help in strategic airlift due to the speed at which Islamists tried to move to the south of Mali.

In a "normal" situation where France would have more time to prepare and anticipate an action that would require that many vehicules and equipments to be transported, then airlift might not be the cheaper option.
There is currently one BPC heading to the North of Africa with quite a bit of equipments/vehicules etc. on board. Coupled with the A-400M (which as it has been pointed out is years behind...) for rapid projection, I believe there is more than enough to do the job.

Heavy helicos might be useful be then again depending on the situation on the ground, CN-235 will probably do the job (probably why France is securing one airport after the other). I don't believe the operational Puma fleet is anywhere near the number quoted in a recent post, but from what I can gather quite a few transport helicopters have been transported to Mali to complement those already nearby in Niger that were used by SFs.

This is not very intersting it is just plain BS, I don't know if it is just a sign of ignorance or the colonel is in complete bad faith.
Anyway this officer shows no respect for the 52 Italian casulaties and the 56 German casualties who died in A-stan since the start of the operations, let alone for the military efforts of the involved Countries.

I invite the "many oserving from the sidelines" to find better sources on that conflict.

How long will it before there is a real need for troop carrying helicopters and or MERT helicopters and if the need is identified who will supply them as this is possibly another area the French are lacking at this time. The UK is at this time hard pressed with the puma fleet in upgrade and Merlin and Chinook fleets hard worked in A-stan that only really leaves the poor old Navy HC4 Sea Kings but again this would be more mission creep for the UK. Who has any real capability in this area

Very funny, as Gao airport was taken last night using heliported troops... Bad timing. Any idea of french helos transport capability? I doubt it

Very funny, as Gao airport was taken last night using heliported troops... Bad timing. Any idea of french helos transport capability? I doubt it

Sorry my understanding is that Gao airport was taken by ground troops supported by air attacks and once the airport was held more troops were flown in to reinforce but nowhere I have read said that troops were helicopter in. please send me a photo or link to say they where many thanks

He's still at the Ecole de Guerre.
I can also clarify what was quoted, since I actually met him two weeks ago at a talk about... French interventions in Africa.
Glendora, if that makes you happier he was very critical of Sarkozy as well, in the way his personal interventionism (or, micromanagement tendencies) heavily restricted the freedom of action of the French troops deployed in Kapisa after the first casualties were sustained (this after ordering them deployed over there...). Basically succumbing to the "zero death syndrome". Burdening them with restrictive rules of engagement intended to minimize the risk of taking casualties, forgetting that in war, you don't achieve anything by not taking risks.
It's the same attitude he criticized in other countries, especially since in the ened, it didn't prevent casualties anyway.

Sorry my understanding is that Gao airport was taken by ground troops supported by air attacks and once the airport was held more troops were flown in to reinforce but nowhere I have read said that troops were helicopter in. please send me a photo or link to say they where many thanks

After seizing the airport in Timbuktu overnight, French and Malian forces are preparing to retake the historic desert city. The bloodless assault on the city’s airport involved France’s first operational paratroop drop since 1978.

[...]Reporting from the airport where he is embedded with French forces, FRANCE 24 correspondent Mathieu Mabin said that “not one shot had been fired” and that the mission had included France’s first operational paratroop drop in 35 years.

This is not very intersting it is just plain BS, I don't know if it is just a sign of ignorance or the colonel is in complete bad faith.
Anyway this officer shows no respect for the 52 Italian casulaties and the 56 German casualties who died in A-stan since the start of the operations, let alone for the military efforts of the involved Countries.

I invite the "many oserving from the sidelines" to find better sources on that conflict.

Given the type of war being fought in Afganistan, casualties don't necessarily have to be combat troops - IEDs, green v vblue, random ambushes, bombings, occassional helicopter shotdowns, accidents.

As you can see many accidents, IEDs, green v blue, suicide bombings and ambushes.

Many partners are involved in support operations (training, logistics, security, development, engineering, peacekeeping) and not dedicated combat troops.

From memory most of the German and Italian contingents are not primarily combat ones and they initially have very limiting rules of engagment. The Germans are posted in a relatively quiet part of Afghanistan too.

Fromn what I've read I'd agree with the colonel's statements.

In Kosovo, the US found the NATO command structure so cumbersome it ran large chunks of its missions as non-NATO missions.

It was the same in Libya. And as stated many Coalition forces in Afghanistan are of limited utility due to politically imposed restrictions.

Joint ops have always been problematic due to political and national interests.

Even in WWII there was considerable tension between Britain and USA (e.g. Churchill kept pushing for an invasion of the Balkans as opposed to France, issues with command structure and whose troops participated where or were under whose command).

In this day and age the politicians are involved in directing combat operations to a level that would make Hitler proud.

(OHP stands for Opération HéliPortée).
OTOH, the following link (below) affirms that helicopters from the Groupement aéromobile operated around Timbuktu too.

About Gao, this indicates that a "poser d'assaut" (meaning: a Transall landing, unloading, and taking-off again in one swift move) was used on the airport, and that Tigre helicopter(s ?) operated in the area too.